Hillary Claims That Being Denied Your Own Gun Makes You Safer, But Take Her Gun And You’re Encouraging Her Assassination.

Typical liberal trash talk from the Clinton campaign about some innocent and truthful remarks from Donald Trump have enlivened the press in the last two days. Trump merely made the obviously accurate statement that since Hillary and her liberal/progressive allies want to take all guns from the possession of normal people, why not remove Hillary’s guns (possessed of course by the private and secret service bodyguards that surround her every minute) and see how secure that makes her feel. After all, liberals always make the argument that your gun threatens you and your family just by being in your home, so the many guns that surround Hillary all day, every day, must be an even greater threat to her. So, following her own logic, Trump suggested getting rid of this evil threat that hangs over Hillary.

There has been much discussion the last year of so about white privilege and how white people have benefits and privileges that no other group in America has. But from my perspective, I see only liberal privilege. Some examples are the multi-million dollar Manhattan penthouse that Chelsea Clinton lives in. Chelsea pulled down a six-figure income from NBC without once appearing on the air nor writing a substantive article for the network. She was paid this enormous salary, right out of college, to buy access to her liberal family: liberal privilege.

Hillary not being prosecuted for her email crimes and her national security violations while serving as Secretary of State is another example of liberal privilege, while, at the same time, the Department of Justice is going after Sheriff Joe Arpaio with all the heft they can generate because he DID abide by the law and made every effort to capture and punish law-breakers in Arizona. The liberal gets a privilege to skate free, while the non-liberal goes to jail, in the opinion of the Obama DOJ.

Then there’s the example of Hillary Clinton, a liberal, anti-gun politician, who gets to have many guns defending and protecting her as the beneficiary of this privilege, while everyone else feels the constitution being eroded by the liberal push to outlaw guns. And in anticipation of the liberal comeback that Trump is also surrounded by secret service guns, the difference is that he supports the second amendment, and Hillary, the liberal, doesn’t.

As is typical and expected when dealing with liberals, Hillary’s campaign spokesman, Robby Mook, claimed that Trump was “inciting people to violence” with his remark about Hillary’s guns. But Mr. Mook is admitting something that liberals never like to speak about when they condemn gun ownership for the violence committed by criminals carrying guns: our society, especially during the Obama administration, has become extremely violent in general and violently anti-police in particular, and the need for a personal defense system has become more critical than during the years prior to Obama. And, as can be expected, the Associated Press even jumped on the Hillary bandwagon by stating that Trump’s statement was a “call for Clinton’s assassination”, an intention that only occurs in the liberal-privileged mind.

Of course the Clinton campaign objected to Trump’s comments, they always do. And they inevitably misrepresent what the Republican, any Republican, says, especially Trump, who has a way of going to the heart of Democrat lies and their confusion, and prodding them painfully, but always softly, verbally and non-violently.